Harry Kane | Bayern Munich player

If we sign Kane, what's the idea?

By that, I mean, Kane is not a pressing centre forward. He's not really a fox in the box. These days when I see Kane, I see him dropping deep and trying to get involved in the build up. Is that what we want from our #9?

Obviously, in a vaccum, Kane is a great striker and a great signing. However, we are not operating in a vaccum. We are operating in a situation where we a) need to think of how Kane would fit with the puzzle pieces we have and b) need to think of where we want to go as a club.

If we sign Kane we won't be pressing, so why did we get Rangnick as a temp? I'm confused.
 
cyberman said:
Yeah, but barely. Freshly turned 29 isn’t fecking old, we could have him for 4 years and still be 32 in his final season.
Not everyone has to be 18 and we can pretend it will be 12 years of world class excellence. Harry is nothing like Ronaldo or Cavani
Click to expand...

Kane would cost at least 100m. Considering that we're speaking about Spurs then I presume that they would take us to the cleaners either by asking all the fee in cash (as Leicester did for the Championship level CB they sold us off) or by asking a higher fee. Then there's the salary to be taken into account. Kane would probably ask for a long term contract (5 years?) on ridiculously high salary (Ronaldo's salary?). Ronaldo is currently on 25m per year. If Kane is around that then we're looking to an eye watering investment of around 250m. Is it worth for a 29 year old striker whose already having injury issues?
 
romufc said:
Fair enough, that my bad, I thought you were generally saying he is over rated. Obviously £100m or more for a 29 year old is a bit of a waste.
Click to expand...

Maybe I should have explained myself better so my bad too.
 
I can't see how it makes any sense tbh.

He's a top striker...but it'll be an astronomical transfer fee for a player who isn't in any way the final piece of a puzzle.
 
devilish said:
Kane would cost at least 100m. Considering that we're speaking about Spurs then I presume that they would take us to the cleaners either by asking all the fee in cash (as Leicester did for the Championship level CB they sold us off) or by asking a higher fee. Then there's the salary to be taken into account. Kane would probably ask for a long term contract (5 years?) on ridiculously high salary (Ronaldo's salary?). Ronaldo is currently on 25m per year. If Kane is around that then we're looking to an eye watering investment of around 250m. Is it worth for a 29 year old striker whose already having injury issues?
Click to expand...

When a player desperatly want to leave their club, its not uncommon to that they will accept a lower salary just to be able to leave.
However, I don't understand why Harry Kane would think he has more chance to win trophies at Manchester United than Tottenham on the short term.

As for Kane's age, he is for me a type of striker than can still be class even with his pace gone. You can always build a system where the other forwards will bring the speed to the table and use him as a playmaker that drops into the midfield and then get his presence in the box.
 
VinchNow said:
When a player desperatly want to leave their club, its not uncommon to that they will accept a lower salary just to be able to leave.
However, I don't understand why Harry Kane would think he has more chance to win trophies at Manchester United than Tottenham on the short term.

As for Kane's age, he is for me a type of striker than can still be class even with his pace gone. You can always build a system where the other forwards will bring the speed to the table and use him as a playmaker that drops into the midfield and then get his presence in the box.
Click to expand...

This is Kane's last huge pay cheque. I very much doubt that he'll settle for a pay cut especially to come to a club that can't guarantee him success as Liverpool/City would do. Regarding your second paragraph I am more concerned about his injury record and the prima donna's fighting between him and Ronaldo rather then his lack of pace. The latter is a huge issue considering how weak our dressing room is.

In my opinion its time that our DOF, technical director and scouts earn their salary. If they can only come up with the likes of Maguire, AWB, Varane, Ronaldo, Bruno Rice and Kane then we might as well fire the lot and let a FM enthusiast do the work for free.
 
Oil/state-owned clubs and those with need of a final piece should be the only ones looking at Kane. His age isn't even the biggest concern; his injuries simply cannot be ignored or not a major factor in deciding to make the decision to purchase.

I don't know now how or why he'd be compared to Lewandowski whose injury record is one of the most positively outstanding among elite footballers, let alone those edging towards final contracts.
 
I doubt Levy snubbed 100-130m just to sell him 12 months later at a cut price, it's going to be too high for us and an underwhelming move for Harry, 5 years since we won anything and have slumped alongside Spurs in the league. I can only see a deal being done if one or zero years left on his contract. He's still the main player there and important to whoever the manager is.
 
UnitedSofa said:
& score boat loads and then the CAF would cry about why we didn’t sign him
Click to expand...

You talk as if we have the chance to sign Kane. He would cost 100m, our total net spend will probably be far lower than that and we need to fill several positions.

We have a real cash crisis this summer after missing out on champions league, shelling out for new manager, training ground upgrade and loosing so many players for free.
 
If Harry Kane moves now, it will be for a club that can challenge for titles and trophies. Why move sideways from Tottenham to United and find utter turmoil and no guarantee for success at his age? He doesn't even know the manager for next season, or if that manager will be in place in two seasons so to speak - that's how bad it is here now.
Kane would lose his status as a one-club hero if he goes to United, and to be very frank, I do not believe he has any interest in doing so. The ship sailed a long time ago, they should have invested 150M in him 2-3 years ago and it would have been worth it easily.
 
James Peril said:
If Harry Kane moves now, it will be for a club that can challenge for titles and trophies. Why move sideways from Tottenham to United and find utter turmoil and no guarantee for success at his age? He doesn't even know the manager for next season, or if that manager will be in place in two seasons so to speak - that's how bad it is here now.
Kane would lose his status as a one-club hero if he goes to United, and to be very frank, I do not believe he has any interest in doing so. The ship sailed a long time ago, they should have invested 150M in him 2-3 years ago and it would have been worth it easily.
Click to expand...
Agreed, I think us is a sideways move at this point. It's City or stay at Tottenham I think.
 
So what is our "warchest" for this summer? Unless we have at least 200mil to spend, I don't see how we can afford Kane while fixing a couple of other positions. We're dealing with Levy here.
 
Paying 100m for a 29-year-old striker with constant niggling injuries who never starts the season well, what could go wrong?
 
ti vu said:
So what is our "warchest" for this summer? Unless we have at least 200mil to spend, I don't see how we can afford Kane while fixing a couple of other positions. We're dealing with Levy here.
Click to expand...

I agree that is the key question. We can’t afford 100m on any player this summer. Even if we could afford it, our owners would never even spend that amount on a 29 year old with no resale value.

I am very interested to see who we sign as a striker this summer.
 
Wilt said:
If not Kane, realistically who then?
Click to expand...

The only reason Kane would leave Spurs for an uncertain spell at United is money but I honestly think he's motivated by trophies at this point in his career. United will not guarantee trophies, a team like City will. If Haaland ends up at Real Madrid, City will be back in for Kane and his choice will be clear

Is he our only viable option? They're younger players out there that won't cost as much as hard balling Levy would demand for Kane. I'd rather the club looked into the likes of Tammy Abraham, Lautaro Martinez, Moussa Dembele and Jonathan David for instance. Players like Isak and Joao Felix at a cut price might also be worth looking into. All of them could be available at the right price this summer.

I could see Abraham as a Rashford replacement if he does leave Roma. We shouldn't sleep on Abraham, he didn't make it at Chelsea but I think he could have a lot more to show in England. Let's not forget players like Salah and De Bryune were let go by Chelsea before hitting their stride
 
Last edited:
Forget Kane.....

Use the money to sign Declan Rice. He can be our midfield leader for the next decade...
 
James Peril said:
If Harry Kane moves now, it will be for a club that can challenge for titles and trophies. Why move sideways from Tottenham to United and find utter turmoil and no guarantee for success at his age? He doesn't even know the manager for next season, or if that manager will be in place in two seasons so to speak - that's how bad it is here now.
Kane would lose his status as a one-club hero if he goes to United, and to be very frank, I do not believe he has any interest in doing so. The ship sailed a long time ago, they should have invested 150M in him 2-3 years ago and it would have been worth it easily.
Click to expand...

This as well. Apart from it not being the right move for us, it makes even less sense to Kane.

He wants to get to the end of his career with some trophies. We are miles from challenging for major honours.

Sure he might win a Europa League or FA Cup with us if we get a decent run...but it's hardly a draw.
 
We're going to go all in for Kane because City are probably going to land Haaland, and our fanbase can't handle any of our rivals getting a good player.
 
crossy1686 said:
We're going to go all in for Kane because City are probably going to land Haaland, and our fanbase can't handle any of our rivals getting a good player.
Click to expand...

Isn’t it the board who crapped the bed and got Ronaldo? :lol:

The fans just want normal signings who will make us successful. It’s the board who want big shiny marketing assets.
 
Kane is a big name even here in India. So I can see why utd board wants him. Beyond comical when a RB, CB, DM, RW are all required. Kane would be great, but the rest of the team needs big surgery.
 
Even if we were just selling martial, we would have to pay them to take him, he is in such terrible form.
 
Signing a 29 year old CF who already doesn't press particularly well and has struggled with ankle injuries at the peak point of his career in terms of transfer/wages when we need so much work elsewhere as well? No thanks.

The type of striker we sign depends on the manager to a large degree but generally they should be young, aggressive and not cost 100m.
 
I don’t think he will cost 100M this time if he is to go in this year’s summer transfer window. Probably 75M max tops. I think it’s a great deal for the buying club if that’s the price Spurs set for him . I do think Spurs owe him that after what had happened when they refuse to sell him to City
 
SATA said:
I don’t think he will cost 100M this time if he is to go in this year’s summer transfer window. Probably 75M max tops. I think it’s a great deal for the buying club if that’s the price Spurs set for him . I do think Spurs owe him that after what had happened when they refuse to sell him to City
Click to expand...

Spurs owe him absolutely nothing other than what is written on his contract. If he moves in the summer it will because Levy decides to sell him.
 
Our constant desire for quick fixes will ensure that we win no league title for another 5-7 years minimum (could be much much longer).
 
Sell Martial + VDB and then throw 40m on top. We can buy Kane without taking a big hit
 
crossy1686 said:
We're going to go all in for Kane because City are probably going to land Haaland, and our fanbase can't handle any of our rivals getting a good player.
Click to expand...
I think our fan base can deal with intelligent signings and good coaching. It's our board and executives that have a hard on for chucking money at every problem without a plan or vision in mind.
 
balaks said:
Spurs owe him absolutely nothing other than what is written on his contract. If he moves in the summer it will because Levy decides to sell him.
Click to expand...

The second sentence may be true. But the first really isn't how most football clubs operate. It is common for players and sporting directors to have informal agreements along the lines of "Stay another year and you can go next summer as long as we get a reasonable fee." This is true of even the biggest clubs (ie, United made these kinds of agreements with Ronaldo and De Gea (although the latter's move fell through), Liverpool made a similar agreement with Suarez, Chelsea had this kind of agreement with Hazard).

I don't know what kinds of talks have occurred between Kane and Levy but if they had that kind of agreement and Levy backed out last summer then Kane had every right to be upset. And if they papered it over last summer by agreeing that he could go this summer, then Kane will have every right to be doubly angry. If Levy is going back on those kinds of informal agreements its really small time behavior and will be self-defeating in the long run as players and agents surely talk about these things and no big player will want to sign with Tottenham in the future if he feels that he can't trust the club chairman and that he'll never get a move elsewhere unless his contract runs out.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.